On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Morten Stenshorne <mstensho@opera.com> wrote:
> "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> The baseline of a flexbox item is just whatever their display type
>> says it should be (there's no "flexbox item" display type).
>
> That would mean that a flexbox item with e.g. display:block and a
> flexbox item with display:inline-block would get their baselines
> calculated differently (first line vs. last line). Do we really want
> that?
It's the simplest answer. Those display values had their baselines
defined that way for a reason. There's no real reason to mix, say,
display:block and display:inline-block - they're treated identically
by Flexbox otherwise, so you might as well declare all the children as
one or the other if you want a particular baseline out of all of them.
On the other hand, table cells do their alignment with a special
definition, which you modified in your original post. Hm.
Ojan, Tony, Alex, Daniel, do you have any particular opinion on this?
I can specify it either way - we can either keep the current "flexbox
items have their normal baselines, based on their display value" or
determine the baseline the same way that table-cells do.
Also, what are all of you doing currently for the baseline of the
flexbox itself (for both 'row' and 'column' flexboxes, if it makes a
difference, and for the special case when the baseline of all the
children is perpendicular to the direction of the flexbox)?
~TJ